ClickCease

Results for trial period dismissal

Showing 25-32 of 169 results
BALI v R1i TECHNOLOGY LIMITED [2025] NZERA 409 - Webex dismissal without fair process

R1i Technology dismissed Mr Bali during a Webex meeting and then confirmed the decision in writing. The employer did not participate in the ERA proceeding and the evidence showed no meaningful process satisfying the minimum statutory tests of procedural fairness.

Matched passage: Mr Bali's dismissal [33] Due to its lack of engagement in the Authority's investigation, the exact basis for R1i's decision to dismiss Mr Bali is unclear.
PAETZ v SOLLY'S FREIGHT (1978) LIMITED [2025] NZERA 319 - The Authority found a constructive dismissal was established.

Mr Paetz resigned from Solly's Freight after disputes about excessive hours and the employer's failure to conduct a required pay review. He argued those ongoing breaches caused his resignation and also independently disadvantaged him while employed.

Matched passage: Practical takeaways Constructive dismissal turns on whether the employer's conduct forced resignation in substance.
Mere Broughton v The Whanau Ora Community Clinic Ltd [2023] NZERA 52 - Unjustified dismissal, probation clause misused

Mere Broughton was dismissed after 106 days at The Whanau Ora Community Clinic. Her agreement contained a probation clause, and the dispute centred on the employer's attempt to use that clause as a shortcut to termination rather than carrying out a substantively justified and fair process.

Matched passage: The probation and "90 day" issue The employment agreement contained a probation provision (per Employment Relations Act 2000, section 67), but it did not contain a compliant statutory trial period clause (section 67A).
TRANG BUI v HUYNH [2025] NZERA 72 - dismissal and employment-entitlement claims partly successful

Trang Bui worked in a small hospitality business where the parties disputed pay, working arrangements and the circumstances in which her employment ended. The ERA considered dismissal and disadvantage claims alongside minimum employment entitlement issues.

Matched passage: ... 9-12 September 2024 (Wellington) Determination date: 14 February 2025 Outcome: Unjustified dismissal found; 90-day trial defence rejected; remedies ordered. Story in plain English This decision deals with a dismissal during what the employer said was a 90-day trial period, and ...
Jimmy Nelson v The Digger Man Limited [2025] NZERA 835 - dismissal for unexplained absences held unjustified on process; remedies reduced 50% for contribution; $720 lost wages and $5,000 compensation

Jimmy Nelson was dismissed by The Digger Man after repeated attendance problems and unexplained absences. The employer had genuine concerns, but the issue was whether it gave him a final, fair opportunity to understand the seriousness of the latest incidents and explain himself before termination.

Matched passage: The Authority treated 1 November 2023 as the effective dismissal date.
Gemma Pedersen v Super Vape Store Limited [2026] NZERA 108 - dismissed by WhatsApp on KPI probation grounds without proper training; unjustified disadvantage and dismissal upheld; $15,917.48 ordered

Retail assistant Gemma Pedersen was dismissed by WhatsApp/email during a six-month probation period for allegedly missing sales KPIs. She said she had not received the promised practical training and had never been put through a genuine performance process before termination.

Matched passage: 48 (gross) for the gap period.
LAZARO v WAIMEA CONTRACT CARRIERS LIMITED [2025] NZERA 472 - no dismissal at December meeting; later termination and notice addressed

Mr Lazaro said Waimea Contract Carriers dismissed him at a 4 December meeting; the employer said he was merely suspended on full pay while training and other options were considered, and that employment ended later after he refused to return.

Matched passage: Practical takeaways Constructive dismissal turns on whether the employer's conduct forced resignation in substance.
Thuy v Huynh [2025] NZERA 74 - 90-day trial failed; dismissal for seeking employment advice unjustified

A nail technician was dismissed during a purported 90-day trial after seeking advice about her employment rights. The employer had not complied with the notice requirement in its own trial clause.

Matched passage: At a glance Citation: [2025] NZERA 74 Registry: Wellington Authority member: Claire English Investigation meeting: 9-12 September 2024 Determination: 14 February 2025 Outcome: Unjustified dismissal and disadvantage established; 90-day trial protection unavailable.

Browse topics